Nasheman

India's largest selling Urdu weekly, now also in English

You are here: Home / 2015 / Archives for March 2015

Archives for March 2015

An interview with Pahlaj Nihlani the new chairman of Central Board Of Film Certification

by

“The Film Industry Should See The Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) As A Friend, Not As A Hostile Force.” – Pahlaj Nihalani

Pahlaj Nihalani. Photo: Rajeev Bhatt

Pahlaj Nihalani. Photo: Rajeev Bhatt

Pahlaj Nihalani, the reputed filmmaker, needs no special introduction as far as his filmmaking repertoire is concerned. But of late he has come in for a lot of flak since the time he has been appointed as the chairperson of the Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC). On this account Pahlaj Nihalani averred in clarification, “Maybe some people don’t like that I have restored transparency in the censor board. I can’t comment on what someone in the censor board thinks to be right or wrong. All I can tell very categorically is that I have been working within the Information & Broadcasting Ministry & Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) guidelines.” Even otherwise 2 members of the Censor Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) Ashoke Pandit & Dr. Chandraprakash Diwedi have leveled serious charges of autocratic functioning against Pahlaj Nihalani. Both of them have expressed their dissatisfaction by categorically stating that the Government is not pleased with the cuss – word ban by Censor Board, can take action. Here in this free wheeling interactive session Pahlaj Nihalani clarifies his stance.

One of the Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) board member Ashoke Pandit has leveled some very serious charges against you. Do you think it was right on the part of Ashoke Pandit to go public with his grievances?

Frankly speaking I can’t comment on what someone in the censor board thinks what is right or what is wrong. All I can tell you very categorically is that I have been working within the Information & Broadcasting Ministry & Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) guidelines. Maybe so far the censor board has been functioning in a different way. And now some people don’t like the fact that I have restored discipline & transparency in the workings of the Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) and its  circular banning cuss words put on hold.

The protesters in the Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) say that your style of working is tyrannical?

But It is my duty to do my job to the best of my abilities. As long as I am the chairperson of the Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) I won’t compromise on my work and I won’t buckle under pressure just because some people are uncomfortable with my style & way of working.

Do you think it was right of Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) board members to go public with their grievances?

I don’t want to comment on any individual. But if anyone chooses to go public with the grievances against a Governmental organization, then he or she is working against the interests of the Government. It’s therefore ethically & legally wrong of them.

Has the Information & Broadcasting Minister Rajyavardhan Rathore been informed about the revolt within the censor board?

If I answer that I would be doing exactly what these other board members are doing. Let me just say that the Minister Rajyavardhan Rathore is a very smart & an intelligent person. He knows exactly what people are doing and those who are going against the guidelines are definitely brought to his notice. For instance Central Board Of Film Certification’s – CBFC rifts (spilt) in the open.

Ashoke Pandit also claims that you see every film on your own and decide what is to be done?

Firstly, as the chairperson I have a right to either watch films personally as and how I want, or depute someone from the censor board to watch it. If so far, my predecessors have not been watching films personally, they were in the wrong. If I am doing the right thing now, if I am clearing as many as 5 films in 1 day, why are some members of the censor board getting jittery?

Your working method has diminished the chances of corrupt practices?

For the 1st time in the existence of the Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC), I scheduled 5 films to be watched by the Revising Committee on the same day. Never before has the censor board watched more than 1 film on any given day. Is that not a good thing? We went out of the way of our schedule by censoring ‘NH10’ as we didn’t want to delay their 13th Mar, 2015 release.

Both disgruntled board members Ashoke Pandit & Dr. Chandraprakash Diwedi have accused you of being unfair to NH10?

Unfair? After seeing the film audiences are laughing at such accusations. We have gone out of our way to retain the violent flavor of the film. We have censored the film according to the script’s demand. That’s how every film will be censored. We only changed the dialogues a bit. I am a producer & a director myself. I know what cuts can be made without affecting the narrative. I wonder how Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) board members commented on the picture without seeing it.

Even the film’s producers including Anushka Sharma have been voicing protests against the CBFC?

After the film was censored the producers & the directors said they were satisfied with the cuts. They had appealed to us not to cut certain scenes. All of us 9 members conceded to their appeal for the sake of their creativity. We will deal with every film on an individual basis. ‘NH10’ needed the violence. The social message is quite clear and very strong here. The producers were happy. I don’t know if some of the Central Board Of Film Certification  (CBFC) board members are unhappy.

Are you saying that Ashoke Pandit & Dr. Chandraprakash Diwedi have commented on your censoring of ‘NH10’ without seeing the film?

If they had seen the film they wouldn’t have said what they had to. I don’t know what they are talking about. From the day I have taken over as chairperson of the Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) they have ganged up against me. Without the permission from the Information & Broadcasting ministry they have been publicly commenting on the internal workings of the Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC).

What would you say in your defense?

I don’t have to defend myself against such absurd charges. From the day I took over as the chairperson of the Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) I have respected the opinion of each & every member of my censor board. I value their opinion. They have toiled hard to clear the backlog of films to be censored. We have cleared all applications for censorship till 4th Mar, 2014. Even the promotional clippings will now be cleared within 24 hours. The film industry should see the CBFC as a friend, not as a hostile force.

How do you plan to deal with the revolt?

By doing my duty and working honestly. I am not bothered with the naysayers. My work will speak for itself. As for the protesters, they are violating the rules of the Information & Broadcasting ministry by working against the interest of the Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC). The Ministry will decide what to do with them.

US soldier admits killing unarmed Afghans for sport

by

Jeremy Morlock, 23, tells US military court he was part of a ‘kill team’ that faked combat situations to murder Afghan civilians

US Army Specialist Jeremy Morlock, who admitted being part of the 'kill team' that murdered unarmed Afghans. Photograph: Reuters

US Army Specialist Jeremy Morlock, who admitted being part of the ‘kill team’ that murdered unarmed Afghans. Photograph: Reuters

by Paul Harris, The Guardian

An American soldier has pleaded guilty to being part of a “kill team” who deliberately murdered Afghan civilians for sport last year.

Army Specialist Jeremy Morlock, 23, told a military court he had helped to kill three unarmed Afghans. “The plan was to kill people, sir,” he told an army judge in Fort Lea, near Seattle, after his plea.

The case has caused outraged headlines around the world. In a series of videotaped confessions to investigators, some of which have been broadcast on American television, Morlock detailed how he and other members of his Stryker brigade set up and faked combat situations so that they could kill civilians who posed no threat to them. Four other soldiers are still to come to trial over the incidents.

The case is a PR disaster for America’s military and has been compared to the notorious incidents of torture that emerged from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. This week the German magazine Der Spiegel published three pictures that showed American soldiers, including Morlock, posing with the corpse of a young Afghan boy as if it were a hunting trophy.

Some soldiers apparently kept body parts of their victims, including a skull, as souvenirs. In a statement issued in response to the publication of the photos the US army apologised to the families of the dead. “[The photos are] repugnant to us as human beings and contrary to the standards and values of the United States army,” the statement said.

Morlock has told investigators that the murders took place between January and May last year and were instigated by an officer in his unit, Staff Sergeant Calvin Gibbs. He described how elaborate plans were made to pick out civilian targets, kill them and then make their deaths look like they were insurgents. In his confession Morlock described shooting a victim as Gibbs tossed a grenade at him. “We identify a guy. Gibbs makes a comment, like, you know, you guys wanna wax this guy or not,” Morlock said in the confession.

Morlock now stands to be sentenced to at least 24 years in jail but with eligibility for parole after seven years. That has come about because Morlock struck a plea bargain that will see a lighter sentence in return for testifying against his fellow soldiers.

Plane with 148 on board crashes in southern France

by

Germanwings flight with at least 142 passengers and crew of six goes down in the Alps region, French sources say.

Germanwings Flight 4U9525 was on its way from Barcelona to Dusseldorf when it went down in southern France [Flightradar24.com]

Germanwings Flight 4U9525 was on its way from Barcelona to Dusseldorf when it went down in southern France [Flightradar24.com]

by Al Jazeera

An Airbus plane operated by GermanWings with at least 142 passengers, two pilots and four flight attendants on board has crashed in the French Alps region.

In a live briefing on Tuesday, French President Francois Hollande said it was unlikely that there were survivors, adding that the area of the crash was remote.

Hollande said it was probable that a number of the victims were German. It was not clear whether anyone on the ground had been hurt, he said.

“It’s a tragedy on our soil,” Hollande said.

Hollande “extended all his support” to German Chancellor Angela Merkel during a phone call, the French presidency said in a statement, while the German ambassador to France said she would visit the crash site in the southern Alps within hours.

Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy said in a statement that at least 45 Spanish passengers were believed to be onboard the plane.

‘A loud noise, then nothing’

The owner of a nearby camping site said he heard the plane come down. “There was a loud noise and then suddenly nothing. At first I thought it came from fighter jets that often hold drills in the area,” Pierre Polizzi told Al Jazeera.

“The plane crashed just 2km from here, high on a mountain,” Polizzi, owner of Camping Rioclar, said.

Eric Ciotti, the head of the regional council, said search-and-rescue teams were headed to the crash site at Meolans-Revels.

French TV reported that 240 local firefighters and three police squadrons were mobilised for the rescue effort.

La Provence , a regional newspaper, cited French civil aviation authorities for the number of people on board.

The airliner went down near Digne-Les-Bains in Alpes-de-Hautes-Provence.

Al Jazeera’s Jacky Rowland, reporting from Paris, said the mountainous terrain where the plane went down could complicate the rescue effort.

A French security source confirmed that the aircraft belonged to GermanWings, an affiliate of German airline Lufthansa, and was travelling between Barcelona and Dusseldorf.

The single-aisle A320 typically seats 150 to 180 people.

Germanwings, a low-cost airline, said it would hold a news conference at 1400 GMT at Cologne-Bonn airport in western Germany.

A map on Flightaware.com showed that the plane fell off the radar in the southern French Alps [Al Jazeera]

Karnataka: HC tells govt to improve infrastructure in prisons

by

prison-jail-hands-bar

Bengaluru: In response to a public interest petition, that questioned the lack of facilities to convicts incarcerated in prisons in the State, a division bench of Chief Justice D H Waghela and Justice Ram Mohan Reddy, on Monday, directed the State government to come up with long-term solutions and frame guidelines and policies to improve the infrastructure in prisons.

They also directed the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority to help the prisoners get access to legal aid. The bench said there must be a designated room for prisoners to discuss their cases with their lawyers.

The bench reminded the government of its duty to ensure sufficient remuneration was paid to inmates for the work they do and make them more productive. It said yoga must be introduced in prisons.

No Infrastructure

The petition had highlighted the lack of infrastructure in prisons such as shortage of sleeping berths, lack of bathrooms and toilets, insufficient bedding and accommodation. The government counsel said prisons were overcrowded and the government was “making every effort” to shift some of the prisons to ease the burden.

(Agencies)

CBI Chennai office likely to handle DK Ravi's case

by

D-K-Ravi

Bengaluru: The Chennai office of the CBI has a homicide and burglary squad which is likely to handle the case of DK Ravi once referred by the state government to the CBI HQ through the MHA, which may take another couple of days. This is subject to the headquarters not appointing any special team for the purpose, sources said.  “But given the heat generated by Ravi’s death, a special team handling the matter cannot be ruled out,” they added.

“Normally, in such cases, the case will be either handed over to the CBI office nearest to the place of crime, or a special team will be formed,” police sources familiar with the way the CBI works said. The nearest CBI office in Bengaluru is headed by an officer of the rank of superintendent of police but this chapter specializes only in ‘anti-corruption and banking frauds’ and officials are not well equipped to investigate cases like the one on hand, the sources pointed out.

A fresh line of inquiry?

CBI sleuths will start afresh from the scene of crime and parallel question officials from the CID and city police, and forensic science laboratory experts who have handled the case till now, sources said. Advocates say they can register a case of murder under section 302 and start the investigation from that angle till they reach a conclusion.

Investigating officials will collect all material evidence, documents, statements and related things from the CID and local police. The video CD of the postmortem will also be taken by the CBI.

If required, the CBI may go in for another postmortem, send viscera samples to special labs in Delhi and Hyderabad. Ravi’s call detail records (CDR) for the past six months have been already taken by the CID and if needed, the CBI will get more CDR, sources said.

The investigators will also keep an eye open for any tampering or destruction of evidence, if any, during the course of investigation by local authorities.

(Agencies)

The death of 66A and the dawn of a new era of free speech jurisprudence

by

66a it act

by Siddharth Narrain

It’s not often that India’s Supreme Court strikes down a law in its entirety as a violation of the free speech. But when it does, boy do you want to stand up and cheer. Before a packed courtroom, Justices Rohinton Nariman and G. Chelameswar, pronounced their judgment in Shreya Singhal & Ors. v. Union of India,, striking down, in its entirety, the controversial section 66A of the Information Technology Act in its entirety. The full text of the decision is not available yet. But Justice Nariman read out parts of the court decision, enough to give us a sense of what is to come.

Justice Nariman talking on behalf of the Bench, first referred to the Preamble of the Constitution that guarantees all citizens the liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship. He stressed that the liberty of expression was of paramount importance in our constitutional scheme. He then highlighted salient features of the judgment.

Para 13 deals with the distinction between ‘discussion’, ‘advocacy’ and ‘incitement’. As per the Supreme Court, mere discussion or advocacy of a cause, however unpopular, is protected by Article 19(1)a of the Constitution that guarantees the freedom of speech and expression. Only when speech reaches the level of incitement are 19(2) restrictions attracted. Justice Nariman noted that most of the arguments before the court revolved around the ‘public order’ restriction in 19(2), and therefore unless speech is of the variety that it tends to cause public disorder, it cannot be restricted. Thus the court has built on earlier case law like Ram Manohar Lohia andArup Bhuyan to strengthen and confirm the constitutional protection to speech.

The Court ruled that the public’s right to know was adversely impacted by section 66A of the Information Technology Act, which restricted information that could cause annoyance or was grossly offensive. The Court referred to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Holmes’ famous articulation of the market place of ideas, and said that in order for the state to restrict speech it has to meet the standard of incitement and causal link to the disturbance of public order.

The Court has pointed out section 66A did not make a distinction between mass dissemination and dissemination to one person. Justice Nariman said that the nexus between the message and action taken on the basis of the message was conspicuously absent. The language of section 66A did not require a proximate connection to public order, and instead criminalised mere annoyance.

Justice Nariman said that the language of 66A did not satisfy the “Clear and Present Danger Test” nor the “Tendency to Affect” Test, both of which the judgment elaborates on. Besides ‘public order’, section 66A does not satisfy any of the other terms of restriction provided in Article 19(2). The Court said that the Additional Solicitor General (representing the government) had asked the Bench to read these tests into into section 66A, but if they did so, this would amount to wholesale substitution of the law.

The Court ruled that the language of section 66A did not satisfy the test of vagueness- it did not lay down clearly defined lines thus not allowing for law enforcement to put persons on notice. “What may be offensive to one person is not offensive to another”, said Justice Nariman. The Court said that even the term “persistently” in section 66A was not clearly defined. Thus the section was rendered constitutionally vague. The Court observed that two U.K. judgments cited by the ASG illustrated how even judicially trained minds could differ on the meaning of ‘the term grossly offensive’.

Referring to the government’s argument that the possibility of abuse does not render a law invalid, the Court held that section 66A, which was otherwise invalid could not be saved by the ASG’s assurance that the law would be administered flawlessly. “Governments may come, and governments may go, but the law will remain”, observed the judges.

The judges relied on the Romesh Thapar case to address the issue of severability of the provision (i.e. whether one part of the section could be severed from the rest, but the section in its entirety would remain on the statute book). The Court held that section 66A does not fall within the subject matter of Article 19(2). “No part of the section is severable as the provision as a whole is unconstitutional”, said Justice Nariman.

The Court rejected the Article 14 argument put forward by the petitioners, who had argued that laws governing the regulation of the Internet should be on par with laws governing other media like print, broadcast etc. The Court said that section 66Bof the IT Act onwards did create separate standards for the regulation of the Internet.

The Court also struck down in its entirety section 118D of the Kerala Police Act, a provision similar to section 66A.

The Court, however, upheld the law related to blocking, section 69A, and the connected Rules, in its entirety. As for the Intermediary Rules, the court has upheld section 79 of the IT Act, and the Intermediary Rules subject to reading down both provisions to allow for a requirement whereby a court order is required before an intermediary is required to take down information of it was related to subject matter covered by Article 19(2). One has to read the judgment to see what the Court’s reasoning has been relating to the Blocking Rules and Intermediary Guidelines, as the judges did not elaborate on this in the courtroom.

The petitioners in this case included Shreya Singhal, Common Cause, Rajeev Chandrasekhar, Dilip Kumar Tulsidas, the Peoples Union for Civil Liberties, Mouthshut.Com, Tasleema Nasrin, Manoj Oswal, the Internet and Mobile Association of India and Anoop M.K. (For a more detailed account of their arguments in court see https://ccgnludelhi.wordpress.com/tag/section-66a/) This is a big moment for them, and an even bigger moment for all those who have been crying hoarse about draconian laws in this country that have stifled the liberty to speak one’s mind, to dissent, and to be creative without feeling that one’s hands have been handcuffed by the law.

Siddharth Narrain is a lawyer and legal researcher. This article first appeared on Kafila.org

New Zealand beat South Africa in thriller to reach World Cup final

by

nzwin

by Stephan Shemilt, BBC Sport

New Zealand beat South Africa with a six off the penultimate ball to reach the World Cup final for the first time.

With five needed from two balls, Grant Elliott hit Dale Steyn into the stands to finish unbeaten on 84 and seal a four-wicket win in Auckland.

Elliott and Corey Anderson’s 58 had lifted the Black Caps from 149-4 in their chase of a rain-adjusted 298.

South Africa had earlier posted 281-5, with Faf du Plessis making 82, in a match reduced to 43 overs per side.

Captain AB de Villiers weighed in with an unbeaten 65 for South Africa and David Miller an 18-ball 49 in a target that was escalated by Duckworth-Lewis, but just within New Zealand’s reach.

It was a fourth unsuccessful World Cup semi-final for the Proteas to add to two defeats and the famous 1999 tie with Australia.

For New Zealand, a seventh last-four tie finally yielded a place in the final after six previous losses.

It was earned in a thrilling, fluctuating contest played out in front of a raucous and partisan crowd at Eden Park.

In scarcely believable drama that had echoes of Kane Williamson’s six to defeat Australia by one-wicket earlier in the tournament, South Africa-born Elliott smashed Steyn for six over long-on two balls after Daniel Vettori steered a four to the third-man boundary.

Elliott should have been caught from the final ball of the previous over, but his top-edged hook fell to the ground after a boundary collision by JP Duminy and sub fielder Farhaan Behardien.

That South Africa came so close was down to their third comeback of a game that both teams controlled at various points.

The Black Caps were in the early ascendancy thanks to some dangerous swing bowling and electric fielding that reduced South Africa to 114-3 in the 27th over.

Later, they looked to be sprinting through the run-chase when captain Brendon McCullum destroyed the South Africa attack with a 22-ball half-century that included taking 24 runs from a single Steyn over.

South Africa, though, resisted, just as they had earlier through Du Plessis’ patience, De Villiers’ invention and Miller’s explosive power.

Their defiance in the field came with some help from the home side, as McCullum slapped Morne Morkel to mid-on, Williamson pulled the same bowler on to his own stumps and Martin Guptill was run out in a mix-up with Ross Taylor.

And, when Taylor was caught down the leg side from the off-spin of Duminy, New Zealand still needed 139 from 22 overs.

They were pulled back into contention thanks to the watchful Elliott, who was strong through the covers, and the force of Anderson in a partnership of 103.

De Villiers missed the chance to run out Anderson on 33, failing to gather the ball at the non-striker’s end with the left-hander well short of his ground.

The reprieve was the start of New Zealand’s acceleration towards their target, but after Anderson skied Morkel to square leg with 46 still to get, South Africa clawed their way back once more.

The requirement got down to 23 from the final 12 balls, with 11 runs taken from a Morkel over that included the Elliott reprieve.

A tie would have taken the Black Caps to the final because of their superior group record, but Elliott ensured the co-hosts won outright.

Mars Orbiter mission extended for another six months

by

Launch of PSLV C25

Bengaluru: India’s maiden Mars Orbiter mission was extended for another six months on Tuesday to further explore the Red Planet and its atmosphere, a senior official said here.

“As the 1,340 kg Mars Orbiter has sufficient fuel (37 kg) to last longer than it was intended earlier, its mission has been extended for another six months,” the senior official of the Indian space agency told IANS.

The historic mission has completed six months of orbiting the Red Planet.

India created history by becoming the first country to enter Mars orbit in maiden attempt on September 24, 2014 after a nine-month voyage through the inter-planetary space from Earth.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi was present on the occasion at the Indian space agency’s Mars Orbiter Mission centre in this tech hub.

India also became the first Asian country to have entered the Mars sphere of influence (gravity) in maiden attempt, as a similar mission by China failed to succeed in 2011.

The Rs.450-crore ($70 million) ambitious Mars mission was launched on November 5, 2013 on board a polar rocket from spaceport Sriharikota off Bay of Bengal, about 80 km of Chennai.

“The five scientific instruments onboard the spacecraft (Orbiter) will continue to collect data and relay it to our deep space network centre here for analysis,” state-run Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) director Devi Prasad Karnik said.

Of the five payloads (instruments) onboard, the Mars Colour Camera (MCC) has been the most active, taking several stunning images of the red planet’s surface and its surroundings, including valleys, mountains, craters, clouds and dust storms.

“The camera has beamed to us several breathtaking pictures of the Martian surface and its weather patterns such as dust storms. We have uploaded many pictures on our website (www.isro.gov.in) and our Facebook account for viewing,” Karnik said.

The other four instruments have been conducting experiments to study the Martian surface, its rich mineral composition and scan its atmosphere for methane gas to know if it can support life.

The four instruments are Methane Sensor for Mars (MSM), Lyman Alpha Photometer (LAP), Mars Exospheric Neutral Composition Analyser (MENCA) and Thermal Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (TIS).

MSM measures the natural gas in the Martian atmosphere with PPB (particles per billion) accuracy and map its sources.

LAP is studying the atmospheric process of Mars and measure the deuterium (isotope) and hydrogen ratio and neutral particles in its upper atmosphere.

MENCA and TIS are analysing the neutral composition and measure the temperature during day and night to map the surface composition and mineralogy of Mars.

“As methane is an indicator of past life on Mars, the sensor is looking for its presence in the Martian orbit. If available, we will know its source in terms of biology and geology. The thermal infrared sensor will find out if the gas is from geological origin,” Karnik pointed out.

Scientists at the mission control centre here are monitoring the orbital movement of the spacecraft around Mars and checking health of its instruments round the clock.

“Health and other parameters of the spacecraft are fine and all the essential functions continue to perform normal,” Karnik asserted.

Orbiter takes 3.2 Earth days or 72 hours, 51 minutes and 51 seconds to go round Mars once while orbiting at a distance of 500 km nearest and over 80,000 km farthest from its red surface.

Success of the Mars mission has made India join the elite club of the US, Europe and Russia, which reached the red planet after initial failures.

ISRO became the fourth international space agency after National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) of the US, Russian Federal Space Agency (RFSA) and European Space Agency to have undertaken successful mission to Mars.

Besides Orbiter and NASA’s Maven, two other NASA orbiters, Europe’s Mars Express orbiter and two NASA rovers have been exploring the red planet.

Maven, which reached the Martian orbit on September 22, 2014, is an acronym for Mars atmosphere and volatile evolution. It has been designed to study the red planet’s thin atmosphere in attempt to learn what happened to Mars’s water.

As the fourth planet away from sun, Mars is the second smallest celestial body in the solar system. Named after Roman god of war, it is also known as red planet due to the presence of iron oxide in abundance, giving it a reddish appearance.

(IANS)

Govt asked me to go to Pak National Day celebration: V K Singh

by

General-VK-Singh

New Delhi: Shortly after representing the Government at the national day reception at Pakistan High Commission tonight which kicked up a storm, Minister of State for External Affairs V K Singh issued a series of intriguing tweets defining “disgust” and “duty” indicating that he may have been unhappy at being deputed to it.

In the first of the five quick tweets, Singh, a former Army Chief, said, “To offend the moral sense, principles, or taste of”.

This was immediately followed by another which said, “To sicken or fill with loathing”.

While the third tweet said, “A job or service allocated,” the fourth one said,”The force that binds one morally or legally to one’s obligations”.

The last tweet said,”A task or action that a person is bound to perform for moral or legal reasons”.

Earlier tonight, Singh told reporters after attending the reception that he was asked by the government to represent it at the function.

“The Government of India has to send an MoS. They sent me and I went there and came back,” he said replying to a question about his presence at the reception.

Asked specifically whether Prime Minister Narendra Modi asked him to attend the event, he said, “The Government of India asked me to go there.”

Singh attended the event where several Kashmiri separatist leaders including Mirwaiz Umer Farooq, Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Yaseen Malik were also present.

The Minister’s visit to the Pakistani High Commission came on a day India and Pakistan sparred over Hurriyat leaders’ meeting Pakistani envoy Abdul Basit with government making it clear that there was no role for a third party.

Mirwaiz, Chairman of Hurriyat Conference, along with Abdul Gani Bhat, Maulana Abbas Ansari, Bilal Gani Lone, Aga Syed Hassan, Mussadiq Adil and Mukhtar Ahmad Waza had held talks with Basit last night.

Basit, who invited them to the Pakistan National Day celebrations, said that India was not against these interactions. However, India hit out, saying “the Government of India prefers to speak for itself”.

(PTI)

Supreme Court scraps Section 66A of IT Act

by

Supreme Court India

New Delhi: In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court on Tuesday, struck down section 66A of the IT Act, which gives power to arrest a person for posting offensive contents on web, as unconstitutional.

The verdict came in the hearing of a batch of petitions challenging constitutional validity of certain sections of the cyber law including section 66A.

A bench of justices J Chelameswar and R F Nariman had on February 26 reserved its judgement after Government concluded its arguments contending that section 66A of the Information Technology Act cannot be “quashed” merely because of the possibility of its “abuse”.

Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had said that the Government did not want to curtail the freedom of speech and expression at all which is enshrined in the Constitution, but the vast cyber world could not be allowed to remain unregulated.

However, the court had said that terms like ‘illegal’, ‘grossly offensive’ and ‘menacing character’ were vague expressions and these words were likely to be misunderstood and abused.

The first PIL on the issue was filed in 2012 by a law student Shreya Singhal, who sought amendment in Section 66A of the Act, after two girls — Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Shrinivasan — were arrested in Palghar in Thane district as one of them posted a comment against the shutdown in Mumbai following Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray’s death and the other ‘liked’ it.

The apex court had on May 16, 2013, come out with an advisory that a person, accused of posting objectionable comments on social networking sites, cannot be arrested without police getting permission from senior officers like IG or DCP.

The direction had come in the wake of numerous complaints of harassment and arrests, sparking public outrage.

(Agencies)

KNOW US

GET INVOLVED

PROMOTE

Archives